Don't think we should fire Capers, but we have to play to our strengths, which is man coverage. Our secondary lacks communication to effective run a zone.

You HAVE to be able to run a spread of coverages. No matter how good at it you are, if you run 1 coverage a vast majority of the time, offenses can attack and exploit it. That is the big problem with defenses like the cover 2. Every individual defense has holes and if you consistently give the same looks, the offense can shred it. Capers runs the defensive equivalent of McCarthy's "multiple" offense where Capers uses similar personnel groupings for a variety of alignments and coverages. Is the offense going to sometimes be able to catch you in a bad look? Sure, but overall, in the chess match aspect of it, trying to find a defense that will contain the offense, without being predictable is the way a coach can make an impact.

Yep.

Overall the "Fire Dom" reaction is emotional and reactionary. The key to understanding this is noticing the lack of this "idea" when the defense succeeded merely 2-3 weeks ago running the same (or nearly the same) split of defenses and nobody calling for his head. It's funny to see how everyone is a fan if it works one week, but calling for heads if it doesn't the following. It's absurd.

Furthermore, as you stated, we NEED to be comfortable running a multi-defense and our young guys need the reps. Not only do we need to be able to do it in regular season games (now and later), but especially, we want to be as good as we can for the postseason. We are gonna take our lumps due to youth, but that is a largely solvable problem by giving them experience.

While Capers gets all the credit or all the blame, let us not forget that Darren Perry is in charge of the safeties and Joe Whitt is in charge of the cornerbacks.
When the Oline struggles we dont ask for MM's head, we ask for Campen's.
At some point the position coaches have to be held responsible for getting the assignments and techniques taught to their players, not necessarily Capers_________________

Yeah when I was slicing the game I replayed the angles from that throw a couple of times just staring at the screen like "how did he do that?"_________________

Webmaster wrote:

The difference is that this is a FOOTBALL forum. Heated debates about FOOTBALL are expected and encouraged. If you want to discuss your cure for Ebola, try ebolasfuture.com or any other appropriate forum.

Yeah when I was slicing the game I replayed the angles from that throw a couple of times just staring at the screen like "how did he do that?"

No kidding. During the commercial break I watched it a few more times in disbelief. When Aaron is on there is no one better than him._________________@PJHotel_
Uglystik1072<---Gamertag
Sig brought to you by Justo

Don't think we should fire Capers, but we have to play to our strengths, which is man coverage. Our secondary lacks communication to effective run a zone.

You HAVE to be able to run a spread of coverages. No matter how good at it you are, if you run 1 coverage a vast majority of the time, offenses can attack and exploit it. That is the big problem with defenses like the cover 2. Every individual defense has holes and if you consistently give the same looks, the offense can shred it. Capers runs the defensive equivalent of McCarthy's "multiple" offense where Capers uses similar personnel groupings for a variety of alignments and coverages. Is the offense going to sometimes be able to catch you in a bad look? Sure, but overall, in the chess match aspect of it, trying to find a defense that will contain the offense, without being predictable is the way a coach can make an impact.

Not saying abandoning it all together, but when it's not working, you have to abandon it. We we're consistantly getting beat while we were in zone._________________

Don't think we should fire Capers, but we have to play to our strengths, which is man coverage. Our secondary lacks communication to effective run a zone.

You HAVE to be able to run a spread of coverages. No matter how good at it you are, if you run 1 coverage a vast majority of the time, offenses can attack and exploit it. That is the big problem with defenses like the cover 2. Every individual defense has holes and if you consistently give the same looks, the offense can shred it. Capers runs the defensive equivalent of McCarthy's "multiple" offense where Capers uses similar personnel groupings for a variety of alignments and coverages. Is the offense going to sometimes be able to catch you in a bad look? Sure, but overall, in the chess match aspect of it, trying to find a defense that will contain the offense, without being predictable is the way a coach can make an impact.

Not saying abandoning it all together, but when it's not working, you have to abandon it. We we're consistantly getting beat while we were in zone.

Then they need to learn how to execute it and practice obviously isn't enough._________________

Wilfred wrote:

Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.

I'm a Capers supporter. I have a idea what he is trying to do. If you go strictly man then it limits the amount of plays u can run on defense. Then team's don't have to do a lot of research on the Packers defense. Also team would come in with more plays to beat man. The way Capers is showing more zone and different blitz/cover schemes out of the zones team have to do their homework each week.